motherscratcher wrote:Just so he doesn't feel like he's alone on an island, I'm pretty much right with 7foot3 on this. Not that most of you didn't already know that.

I was just hoping this thread wouldn't be this again.

Which is fine. You're entitled to feel however you want about it. I don't understand why you have a bug up your ass about it, but I'm not going to tell you that you shouldn't be offended or shouldn't think the name should be changed.

My overall point was that I don't understand why people who are not Native American or of Native American descent go picket outside the ballpark. Seems like a strange thing to plant your flag in.

Why is this different from Tyler Perry or Dave Chappelle proliferating stereotypes in their movies or their comedy? Because they're black and it's directed at black people? That makes it ok? If Kevin Smith dressed someone up in blackface and had that person play Madea, there would be a ton of backlash. Hell, people got upset because Robert Downey Jr. dressed up in blackface for Tropic Thunder.

Why do racism and stereotyping get to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on who's doing the stereotyping?

Aren't most Native American names, logos, etc. paying homage to people that were warriors and fought hard to protect their domain? In my opinion, it's not exploiting Native Americans or poking fun at their history. Some disagree. So be it.

I like how ambiguous names like Indians and Redskins and Blackhawks create so much turmoil, but the descendants of the Seminole and Chippewa seem to be entirely behind Florida State and Central Michigan.

A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe

motherscratcher wrote:I just wanted to see what people thought a good new name might be if it came to that.

OK, but why do you not like the Indians name? We've already established that they're phasing out Chief Wahoo, so if that was the problem, they're combating it that way.

Just curious what bothers you about the name.

I don't really have a problem with the Indians name. I think Redskins is bad. Indians, Braves, and Chiefs all reside in some sort of grey area where I'm not sure. I think it's OK to say your not sure about a lot of this kind of stuff, and to be willing to change your mind and be persuaded. What I do know is, like 7foot3 points out, the name is originally derived from a point of view that Native Americans are subhuman savages, and that makes me uneasy. I also believe that just because something is familiar to me, and inoffensive to me, doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't racist or insensitive. And just because someone's in a minority doesn't mean I shouldn't care.

But yeah, the Chief is pretty clearly racist, and I'm not sure how someone could see it any other way. And the hell of it is I like Chief Wahoo. Of course I do. I grew up an Indians fan. It never occurred to me that it's racist until a few years ago. I'll tell you when it really stuck me. I was leaving game 3 (or maybe 4, I was at both) of the 2007 ALCS against Boston. Walking outside the stadium I saw a couple guys with their faces painted up like the Chief. And it was jarring. I was embarrassed. For them, for me, for the entire city. And I don't think those guys were racist. I think they were just Indians fans that somehow didn't realize how that actually looked to some people.

I went to Willoughby South. The mascot is a rebel. A short thick little tough looking dude in a confederate uniform. (Im not suggesting that they need to change the Rebel mascot). I grew up at that school. My old man was a teacher the from before I was born to after I graduated. He and my mother were both students there before me. He as at times a football coach, basketball coach, assistant athletic director, and for over 20 years the varsity baseball coach. I would go run around at practices when I was a kid and the players would pick me up and put me on their shoulders and all that shit. It was great. And there were confederate flags everywhere. I used to wear one as a cape at the football games, which I attended for as long as I can remember. To me that flag represented school pride and good times and all that happy horseshit.

And then when I was a junior (maybe senior) some girl from Bedford wrote a letter of complaint. She was on the girls basketball team and wrote that as an African American she was offended by the confederate flag that was painted on the gymnasium wall behind the hoop. I mean, what a bitch, right? It's not hurting anyone. We're the rebels, but we're not racists. It doesn't mean that shit to us. But word spread that they were going to paint over the flags and we couldn't use them anymore. All because of some whiny girl who was too stupid to wrap her brain around the fact that we weren't racist. And why was she offended anyway? It's just a damn flag right. A petition was floated around and I signed it. Of course I did.

20 years later I look back and holy shit. Are you fucking kidding me? We had a high school with a goddam confederate flag painted on the gym wall! In 1992! How the fuck does that happen? Where were the freaking adults?! I have an excuse. I was just a dumb kid. But, couldn't someone with some sense have put an end to that stupidity before the 90's I mean, holy shit, right?

And that's how we (or more likely our kids) are going to look back at Chief Wahoo. It's going to be "Holy Shit, how the fuck was that around in the year 20xx?" Will the Indians name go with it? I don't know. Probably I think. Maybe not at the same time but it'll eventually go all the same. And some part of me will be sad. Just like I'll be a little sad when the Chief goes as well, even though I know 100% that it's the right thing to do, and I can't believe it hasn't happened already.

Maybe it is all PC bullshit. Maybe it is a very small minority that gets hurt by all of it. Maybe it's ridiculous and unnecessary to change anything. I don't know. But, it ain't going to hurt me, or any of us to change some things. We'll still have our ballclub with the players that we love/hate. We'll still be able to go to the games no matter what is on the hat and what's written across the front of the jersey. And for some people, it just might make a real difference in their lives, and even if I (or you) can't see how it would, I don't think that either of us is in a position to tell them how they should feel.

At the very least, if the name is changed and the Chief is relegated to history's dustbin, Peeker won't have to read about it any more. And he won't have to pretend like he doesn't care even though he's pretty clearly on one side. And he wont have to make any more posts about how either everything is racist or nothing is racist.

Do it for Peeker, dude. Won't somebody think of Peek?

Goddam it. You fucking got me. You got me to write this long ridiculous thing when all I wanted to do was have people tell me that "Yes, Shoremen would make a mighty fine name for a Cleveland ballclub."

peeker643 wrote:Not talking about the local nine. Talking about how "Fighting Irish" is different because you say it is.

Well, I am Irish and I'm offended as hell. And so are 15% of my Irish-American club buddies and we want that shit changed. Now what?

If Snoop organizes a group and they want everyone else to call them that, then I'm fine with that.

You are. Many won't be.

It's not the issue that I'd like to go away, ignore and die quietly. It's the people who ignorantly talk about it and write about it that I'd like to go away. Especially those who are hypocritical in what they say, what they write and how they live. And those are many.

I'm pretty comfortable that this white suburban male has an open mind and practices pretty much what he preaches and has taught his kids the same.

And I'll tell you this: If everyone everywhere, and including on this board, was as racially tolerant and open minded AS THEY CLAIM TO BE, and if everyone in the country and on these boards who claims to see people for their actions and their character as opposed to their skin color, race wouldn't be an issue in this country. It wouldn't be an issue on the boards. It wouldn't be the messy little pile you tried to avoid or had to step lightly around.

Again, tired of hearing the arguments about the Chief or the Irish or the Redskins. A disgustingly large percentage of the people who make the argument don't live up to their public positions or harbor their own biases and prejudices about someone else.

Hypocrisy rules.

The Fighting Irish isn't different just because I say it is. It actually is, and I explained already. You just don't like what I had to say, so you come up with some ridiculous example to attack instead.

Nope- it's not ridiculous. Any chance a group of Irish way back when called themselves that in the same way that some African- Americans call each other the 'N' word? And that large percentages of those same groups are offended by it?

If you are legitimately offended, then say so, and actually do something about it. But you don't get to pretend that there aren't deeper issues at hand than just somebody being offended by the team name and logo.

I've never tried to change your, or anyone else's position on this issue. I get why people want to keep the name and the logo. All I've said is that they were pretty clearly chosen with a racist sentiment, and why wouldn't we want to disassociate with that?

I don't care about the name or the logo. At all. Not whether it stays and not whether it goes. I'd also opine that the entire country was founded and it's constitution written based on the sentiment of racists and misogynists. Maybe the time and attention spent on Chief Wahoo and Redskins would be best served in addressing those issues that still exist. Sports will follow.

And you're right, people are always carrying prejudices. It's hard to avoid. But, I don't see how that should prevent us from at least trying to avoid them. Perfect and better aren't at odds.

Which is exactly why I'll try and make sure my little corner of the world is squared away before I worry about anyone else's. The issue is systemic. It goes away when generations grow up color-blind and with generation after generation having been taught about respect for individuals and other cultures and the differences that, while they may be visible, shouldn't be divisive. BTW, I think in a few more generations this is all (or mostly moot). The blending of races, creeds and colors will make it so. But IMO it won't be accelerated by force of will or shitty articles. YMMV.

motherscratcher wrote:At the very least, if the name is changed and the Chief is relegated to history's dustbin, Peeker won't have to read about it any more. And he won't have to pretend like he doesn't care even though he's pretty clearly on one side. And he wont have to make any more posts about how either everything is racist or nothing is racist.

Do it for Peeker, dude. Won't somebody think of Peek?

I honestly don't care, Mo. Seriously. "Shoremen" is fine. So is "Pierogis", "Walleye", "Clambakes", and anything else. Steal the "Captains" from the minor league affiliate and make that the nickname.

motherscratcher wrote:At the very least, if the name is changed and the Chief is relegated to history's dustbin, Peeker won't have to read about it any more. And he won't have to pretend like he doesn't care even though he's pretty clearly on one side. And he wont have to make any more posts about how either everything is racist or nothing is racist.

Do it for Peeker, dude. Won't somebody think of Peek?

I honestly don't care, Mo. Seriously. "Shoremen" is fine. So is "Pierogis", "Walleye", "Clambakes", and anything else. Steal the "Captains" from the minor league affiliate and make that the nickname.

After all this time, i finally figured out Moscratch's problem with me. Probably subconscious and all, but those 4 times his old man came home and said "god damn, that kid kicked our ass again" probably stuck.

After all this time, i finally figured out Moscratch's problem with me. Probably subconscious and all, but those 4 times his old man came home and said "god damn, that kid kicked our ass again" probably stuck.

After all this time, i finally figured out Moscratch's problem with me. Probably subconscious and all, but those 4 times his old man came home and said "god damn, that kid kicked our ass again" probably stuck.

Yup. I knew you were an asshole long before you knew I knew.

To be fair. As hard as it might be for some to believe. I was a much bigger asshole then.

I guess I had just assumed in time they'd become the Cleveland Tribe with different icons and logos to denote that Tribe didn't refer to Native Americans anymore. Seems like the most logical compromise to me.

To me the whining about Wahoo (or other sports team names or logos) is an example of posturing about symbolism over doing something of substance (which requires effort or dollars or something harder than typing on a keyboard) It's a pose...one struck by people more concerned with thinking well of themselves than out of any concern for the actual minority group on whose part they claim offense.

Give a shit about native Americans? Then volunteer...or donate...or drop a grand or two in their tax-free casinos...something real, in other words. The Wahoo could go away tomorrow, and the real lives of native Americans would not be positively impacted in the slightest.

"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

danwismar wrote:To me the whining about Wahoo (or other sports team names or logos) is an example of posturing about symbolism over doing something of substance (which requires effort or dollars or something harder than typing on a keyboard) It's a pose...one struck by people more concerned with thinking well of themselves than out of any concern for the actual minority group on whose part they claim offense.

Give a shit about native Americans? Then volunteer...or donate...or drop a grand or two in their tax-free casinos...something real, in other words. The Wahoo could go away tomorrow, and the real lives of native Americans would not be positively impacted in the slightest.

danwismar wrote:To me the whining about Wahoo (or other sports team names or logos) is an example of posturing about symbolism over doing something of substance (which requires effort or dollars or something harder than typing on a keyboard) It's a pose...one struck by people more concerned with thinking well of themselves than out of any concern for the actual minority group on whose part they claim offense.

Give a shit about native Americans? Then volunteer...or donate...or drop a grand or two in their tax-free casinos...something real, in other words. The Wahoo could go away tomorrow, and the real lives of native Americans would not be positively impacted in the slightest.

So, if one doesn't volunteer or donate, they can't go "this is probably wrong, and we should back away from it?" I get what you and peeker are saying, and I'm really not trying to change your minds, but we're still making perfect and better enemies here.

And I'm scratching my head at the condescending nature you take towards people who are embarrassed by racist logos or names. Going "that was really dumb, we shouldn't do that anymore" isn't worthy of criticism.

danwismar wrote:To me the whining about Wahoo (or other sports team names or logos) is an example of posturing about symbolism over doing something of substance (which requires effort or dollars or something harder than typing on a keyboard) It's a pose...one struck by people more concerned with thinking well of themselves than out of any concern for the actual minority group on whose part they claim offense.

Give a shit about native Americans? Then volunteer...or donate...or drop a grand or two in their tax-free casinos...something real, in other words. The Wahoo could go away tomorrow, and the real lives of native Americans would not be positively impacted in the slightest.

So, if one doesn't volunteer or donate, they can't go "this is probably wrong, and we should back away from it?" I get what you and peeker are saying, and I'm really not trying to change your minds, but we're still making perfect and better enemies here.

And I'm scratching my head at the condescending nature you take towards people who are embarrassed by racist logos or names. Going "that was really dumb, we shouldn't do that anymore" isn't worthy of criticism.

Yeah. I'm heading to the casino this weekend to drop a few hundred because then I'll be allowed to think Chief Wahoo is a racist caricature without "whining" all over the damn place.

This is my favorite issue ever... not for baseball or political reasons, but psychological ones. We should get 5 pro-Wahoo and anti-Wahoo people in a isolation chamber and force them to reason this shit out like some kind of Red Scare episode of the Twilight Zone. The level of hostility and nonsense is profound.

Don't wanna rant. Probably will. Damn you, Motherscratcher.

Honestly, you don't need to give a shit about the plight of Native Americans to identify Chief Wahoo as a racist stereotype that's kind of embarrassing in the 21st century. This does not require a "whiny liberal PC" pedigree or a history of protest work with Russell Means. You can hate the red people and their damn casinos and STILL know Chief Wahoo is racist. It's just an objective observation and has nothing to do with "offensiveness" whatsoever. The masses of humanity have found racist shit highly entertaining and harmless since the dawning of time. That's cool. Maybe we can even assume that random Sports Illustrated poll is totally right, and most real Indians think Indian mascots are harmless (not sure Wahoo quite equates with the average high school Chippewa, but whatever). The fact still remains... Wahoo doesn't have to offend you or anyone else to be racist. To me, it's more like that feeling you get watching a "questionable" scene in a 1940s Disney cartoon. You're not appalled, not offended, certainly. Just kinda glad society has advanced in its respect for the human race(s) a bit over the past century.

So, the question becomes: "If your logo is blatantly racist, but nobody complains about it or finds it offensive, are you okay having a racist logo for your sports team?"

I know, I know. The Fighting Irish! Well ignoring that Irish is a nationality and not a race, I guess you'd have a point. But I do tend to side with those who say the origin of things DOES matter. Irish Catholics can call themselves fightin Irish. And since somebody brought up some hypothetical Snoop Dogg project, there actually WAS a rap group-- a legendary one-- called NWA... Niggaz with Attitude. And 25 years later, nobody is calling Dr. Dre or Ice Cube a "racist" for addressing themselves as such. The speaker/creator absolutely matters. And Chief Wahoo was most definitely the doodle of some caucasian motherfucker.

Summing up... I agree with Peeker in that I don't care what our name or logo is very much. People that threaten to abandon a sports team cuz their logo changes... I hope the Cavs switching back from blue and orange didn't cost you your liver. Basically, I will never be protesting this stuff on the streets. If someone asks me directly, however, I feel no shame in wishing my favorite baseball team had a better logo. Less silly. Less dated. Less embarrassing. Less racist. Meanwhile, Pro-Wahoo people don't even bother coming up with a reason why we SHOULD keep Wahoo anymore. The "it's part of our history" / South Carolina flag" argument seems dead and replaced with a stance that is actually less Pro-Wahoo and solely about Anti-Politcal-Correctness. It's understandable. PC shit is pervasive and obnoxious right now. But unfortunately, on rare occasions, people we hate can also accidentally be right.

Rat_Tail wrote:Chief Wahoo is no different than Super Mario. Should we ban that too?

Yes, because that is the cause of the people who prefer the Block C caps. We want Chief Wahoo BANNED. And anyone seen wearing his likeness will be moved into special "camps" isolated from proper, politically correct Americans. We will call them Reservations or something to be ironic.

I don't really consider myself to be in either the "pro-Wahoo" or "anti-Wahoo" camp. And of course it's anyone's right to be embarrassed by the Wahoo symbol if that's something in your top million things wrong with the world today. I'm just put off by some people who want to pretend their objection to it is about someone other than THEM.

I defer to Andrew here, because he has written the best and most thoughtful and well-reasoned piece on the subject out of all three hundred such pieces that I have read in my life. I totally get why lots of Cleveland fans would/will be glad to see the logo go. I apologize for condescending, if I did that.

"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Rat_Tail wrote:Chief Wahoo is no different than Super Mario. Should we ban that too?

Yes, because that is the cause of the people who prefer the Block C caps. We want Chief Wahoo BANNED. And anyone seen wearing his likeness will be moved into special "camps" isolated from proper, politically correct Americans. We will call them Reservations or something to be ironic.

Well you obviously don't want it around anymore.

If the time comes where fans can't buy gear with Wahoo on it that's a ban whether you want to call it one or not.

Wahoo is one of the few MLB logos that isn't just a letter. Replacing it with a block C is lazy and lame.

Rat_Tail wrote:Chief Wahoo is no different than Super Mario. Should we ban that too?

Yes, because that is the cause of the people who prefer the Block C caps. We want Chief Wahoo BANNED. And anyone seen wearing his likeness will be moved into special "camps" isolated from proper, politically correct Americans. We will call them Reservations or something to be ironic.

Well you obviously don't want it around anymore.

If the time comes where fans can't buy gear with Wahoo on it that's a ban whether you want to call it one or not.

Wahoo is one of the few MLB logos that isn't just a letter. Replacing it with a block C is lazy and lame.

I don't see how its any more lazy and lame than going 'there are bigger problems to fix, so lets ignore one that is incredibly easy to fix'

And another suburban white male who only cares how racism affects them individually and after thinking about it for no more than two seconds realizes they're fine, and wonders why everyone else shouldn't be fine as well.

7foot3 wrote: suburban white male who only cares how racism affects them individually and after thinking about it for no more than two seconds realizes they're fine, and wonders why everyone else shouldn't be fine as well.

When you bring it to the level of stereotyping someone while assuming you know them, you might get away with it once. I dropped it up above, but now you are repeating yourself. You made your point without the personal attacks.

7foot3 wrote: suburban white male who only cares how racism affects them individually and after thinking about it for no more than two seconds realizes they're fine, and wonders why everyone else shouldn't be fine as well.

When you bring it to the level of stereotyping someone while assuming you know them, you might get away with it once. I dropped it up above, but now you are repeating yourself. You made your point without the personal attacks.

Meh.... Been around way too long to get too bent about that.

Seen way too many preachy and sanctimonious types whose own character shortcomings belie their words.

No way to know about anyone on the boards and 7foot3 may be as good and righteous a dude as there is. Probably the case. I just can't get past the fact that so many who say the right things often are caught up or exposed for doing the wrong things. It happens too often for me not to be cynical about it.

Still waiting for the link to support the claim that "Indians" was specifically The Indians' name was chosen because white people, at that time, thought of Native Americans as subhuman savages, "on the warpath all the time, and eager for scalps to dangle at their belts".

"Strangers passing in the street, by chances two separate glances meet and I am you and what I see his me."

Drawing a caricature of a race and tagging it as identifiable as that race is racism and it has absolutely nothing to do with considering Indians savages. I suggest you re-read what Andrew wrote, because he lays this out clear as day.

e0y2e3 wrote:Drawing a caricature of a race and tagging it as identifiable as that race is racism and it has absolutely nothing to do with considering Indians savages. I suggest you re-read what Andrew wrote, because he lays this out clear as day.

7foot3 wrote:The Indians' name was chosen because white people, at that time, thought of Native Americans as subhuman savages, "on the warpath all the time, and eager for scalps to dangle at their belts". Surely you can see the difference.

7foot3 wrote:That is a quote, taken directly from a local paper in 1915, when they changed the name to Indians. The term "Indians" was also supposed to imply "speed and fight", again take straight from the paper.

A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe

Smalls. It's a quote from the January 17, 1915 edition of the Cleveland Leader newspaper. There are other similar sentiments referred to in other publications at the time. They are consolidated in an article last year in Scene by the Cleveland Frowns guy. Relevant portio:

Of course, it didn't hurt that the new name also happened to reinforce the image of Natives as anachronistic savages, the ballclub a fearsome force to be reckoned with. "In place of the Naps, we'll have the Indians, on the warpath all the time, and eager for scalps to dangle at their belts," wrote the Cleveland Leader in announcing the name change on January 17, 1915. In fact, none of the reports from the four daily Cleveland newspapers even mentions Sockalexis, but each is replete with negative stereotypes.

I spent 10 minutes trig to find some kind of readily available archive for a century old defunct newspaper and failed. Feel free to believe/disbelieve as you will, although I'm not sure why you wouldn't just take 2 commenters word for it.